Communism will fail

Communism will fail.

It failed after trying countless times during the 20th century, and it will fail again.
Specially because the material conditions of the proletariat are better now than they were before.

The proletariat will not revolt: they don't want a revolution. They are comfy, with all the material abundance capitalism provides them.
They don't care about political revolutions or radical changes, they just want to live in peace. Even if it means inequality.

And if the proletariat starts feeling a little bad because of muh inequality, you just give them some "free things": college, healthcare and other bs, but without compromising the majority of the existing private property.

The welfare state is the best way to maintain private property and capitalism. We already realized this: Socdems are our best allies.

And if they "succeed" you just stop them with violence and the use of force, like we have always done.

There’s no way for communism to win. Maybe in a long and distant future, where none of you are alive, after technology is so advanced that machines can produce everything for everyone. But not now, and not in any other way. If communism is the next stage, it will come only thanks to capitalism and advanced technology.

Oh, and when communism becomes popular among the proletariat, so does fascism. Guess which one will be supported by the elite. And yes, money = power.

Other urls found in this thread:“strongly-linked”-to-tuberculosis

By the way, this is by no means a shitpost. I'm looking for serious discussion on how do you all think communism will succeed.

Haven't thought about this but it seems true. How can we prevent this from happening again besides the usual liberal antifa bullshit?



Curious about this. Where is this happening?
I see a general trending contrary to privatization (obviously with exceptions).
Yes, to me wealth inequality is irrelevant.
I know this sounds absurd to a revolutionary, but the masses don't think like you. They want comfort, and usually they get it. Like I said, if things get too harder to control, you just give them more things through the State. It's not that hard to satisfy humans.

Yes, I love socdems. Thanks for protecting my private property.

This is something I have worried about in the past and I think it may even be happening now.

You've read what Marx said about the contradictions of capitalism? Especially in regards to the labor theory of value? If yes, and if you apply it to the current state of capitalism, I can't really share your optimism. I don't think our neoliberal-technocratic elites are nearly as competent as you think they are in upholding the current riches the labor aristocracy in Western countries enjoy.

I see a general trending contrary to privatization (obviously with exceptions)
Check out Europe. I don't know where you live that you could possibly make this statement.

Holy shit. I thought this board was a meme. I thought all the commie shills were busy raiding Holla Forums

I do appreciate the fact you think Nuclear Fusion is somehow hundreds or thousands of years away.
Capitalism is base. Watch a video of any modern animal farming. It is a daily reminder that Capitalists don't give a single fuck about life.
What has Capitalism done for the advancement of humanity?
We live in an age where everything around you is made from plastics, designed with computers, and fabricated with such absurd complications.
You don't know the name of the people who made the transistor, researched plastics, or wrote C.
You know the name of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, because the great lie of Capitalism is that it celebrates success and hard work. You only enjoy this society because Tesla didn't enforce his patents. If he believed in Capitalism we would be much further behind as a society.

This is like saying capitalism won't have an economic downturn.

Will is future tense. Do you mean fail again?

Literally everywhere that I know of. Name one western country where this isn't happening.
Even the biggest welfare states are privatizing healthcare, energy production etc. (Denmark, Sweden, Norway)

Latin America.
I have to be honest: I haven't read about it. I know only some general things about Marx that I've read before: the idea of the capitalist "expropriating" the surplus value that the proletariat generate through his work. That materials conditions shapes culture, and that there are contradictions inside capitalism that will sooner or later make it obsolete.
I don't see them being neoliberals in general. I won't deny there are some among them, but they usually support state intervention (in no way I'm saying state intervention is communism btw).
May you share with me why do you think capitalism will fail? what is this fatal contradiction inside the capitalism system?

You are right, I don't care.
Most people don't.
I wish they didn't suffer like they do, but I don't care if they die too. Eating meat isn't immoral to me.
Yes. And people will believe it.
You are supporting what I said in my thread. People want comfort and material things, and capitalism provides them what they want.

Yes, fail again.

You all seem very sure that capitalism will fail. Why?
There have been very hard recessions, and capitalism still survived, becoming even stronger than before.

Some countries in Latin America.
But I guess you're right.



Capitalism is weaker than it's been in living memory, lrelying completely on free money from the Federal Reserve and is now teetering on the brink of Great Depression 2: Electric Boogaloo

You know Marx already knew that capitalism had to be developed before communism can. Capitalism broke the idea of divine right and implemented at least the possibility of social mobility. It also gave us industrialization. The next step is communism.

Is it even true that it's people in incredibly shitty conditions who are most likely to do revolution though? A revolt, spontaneous and aimless aside from sticking it to some group, doesn't by itself really create a new order. People who are too busy with not starving don't have time to set up a new system. I think you need people who are very optimistic to have a revolution.

You say you don't know about how some things came to be that are very important for the quality of life we have right now, and you also say that these things came about by capitalism? How does that make sense?




After the first few days of euphoria, the workers returned to work and found themselves without responsible management. This resulted in the creation of workers' committees in factories, workshops and warehouses, which tried to resume production with all the problems that a transformation of this kind entailed. Owing to inadequate training and the sabotage of some of the technicians who remained many others had fled with the owners the workers' committees and other bodies that were improvised had to rely on the guidance of the unions…. Lacking training in economic matters, the union leaders, with more good will than success, began to issue directives that spread confusion in the factory committees and enormous chaos in production. This was aggravated by the fact that each union… gave different and often contradictory instruction.[14]

Fucking lol.
brainlet detected

If you didn't want to join the collective you were given some land but only as much as you could work yourself. You were not allowed to employ workers. Not only production was affected, distribution was on the basis of what people needed. In many areas money was abolished. People come to the collective store (often churches which had been turned into warehouses) and got what was available. If there were shortages rationing would be introduced to ensure that everyone got their fair share. But it was usually the case that increased production under the new system eliminated shortages.

In agricultural terms the revolution occurred at a good time. Harvests that were gathered in and being sold off to make big profits for a few landowners were instead distributed to those in need. Doctors, bakers, barbers, etc. were given what they needed in return for their services. Where money was not abolished a 'family wage' was introduced so that payment was on the basis of need and not the number of hours worked.

Production greatly increased. Technicians and agronomists helped the peasants to make better use of the land. Modern scientific methods were introduced and in some areas yields increased by as much as 50%. There was enough to feed the collectivists and the militias in their areas. Often there was enough for exchange with other collectives in the cities for machinery. In addition food was handed over to the supply committees who looked after distribution in the urban areas.[23]


There is not much welfare state in third world.

Nick Land, the metaamphetamine killer robot from the future

you can't really. all that will happen is fascism leads to another massive bloody war then fucks off for another 70 years.

Ah yes, the old logic of "I'm doing well, therefore everyone must be doing well".

Standards of living are dropping all across the Western world, and outside it stand of living has always been awful.

A reminder that the demise of capitalism is a dialectical movement created by the exploitation of workers, the deterioration of real wages, the destruction of natural resources. When humans realize that capitalism is a tumor, they will try to revolt. If the first time fails, a second will follow in time. When the third world can't produce more consumer goods for the western people, the euphoria will end, and capitalism will once again be a system which only benefits the capitalists.

I know what you mean, but I believe that capitalism only incentivized industrialization. The technology was already there to do so.

This a million times. Western people are so stuck up their own ass that they do not know how modern capitalism works. Neo-imperialism is the only thing which keeps western living standards afloat.A steady inflow of cheap resources from the third world, make sure that production for western countries remains profitable.

The outsourcing of jobs was the first hint as to what happens when this process isn't profitable enough. When the resources stop flowing as well, the profitability drops even further, and we will quickly land in a recession.

Then we all die.

Honestly most Westerners are, and will be for a long time, waaay too comfy to engage in some kind of revolution. Revolting is not a small thing, it would require (1) incredibly bad conditions for the bulk of the population and (2) most of the population ascribing the problems directly to capitalism. I think the second requirement will be even harder to satisfy. It seems like more westerners are reaching out to fascism and the alt-right than to socialism as a solution.

Communism might not ever come about, but capitalism is certainly doomed for multiple reasons.

Nothing ever says humanity has to win in the end.

science of deduction. there's no other option.

I've never been of the opinion that communism, or any other endgame people strive for, has to directly win by its own merit, bur rather that capitalism itself will make the conditions for its own existence impossible, forcing a transition to another order.
Occasionally the standing order successfully defends itself, building a fascist or authoritarian structure to forcefully curtail the internal conflicts caused by capitalism, and occasionally the downtrodden emerge as the victor, disassembling the flawed mechanisms that caused their suffering. The former outcome, however, does not solve nor bring to an end the internal contradictions of capitalism, it merely suppresses them temporarily, so the figurative dice-rolling continues. The so called failures of socialist experiments do not matter in the long run, as there is not set limit to opportunities as capitalism will keep providing chances due to its own inherent flaws.
In this day and age, as much as in any other, there's also a third potential outcome: Total systemic collapse, where neither side gets the upper hand, which today may as well be a prelude the end of all civilization.

Just my rambling two cents. I'm not nearly well enough educated to make any serious claims.

Who beat who in ww2, bitch?

Pshh. Jokes on you OP. Whether or not communism succeeds.
I just wanna kill some porkies and fasc.

There is no suffering quota you have to meet in order to be eligible for revolution, it is simply enough that people see things going downhill in a bad way combined with a weak state and an ideological atmosphere.

ITT Holla Forumsack grows a second brain cell and discovers succdems are their friends.

Actually it's the other way around, when communism gets popular fascism get's supported by the elites then becomes popular.

Still user, limited resources, constant crises, growing population. All prior systems crashed eventually capitalism will fail.
No one denies this, comunism is a consequence of capitalist industrialization, read marx.

Face it, capitalism killed South America.

Your argument is based on the argument that communism can only occur through violent revolution, as most LARPers like to believe.

In reality it's more likely to occur as economist Joseph Schumpeter predicted: capitalism gradually weakens itself by degenerating into corporatism (we can already see this). People elect social democratic parties which enact proto-socialist policies like social wealth funds.

A form of laborism gradually replaces capitalism (worker co-operatives). Technology innovations will allow single workers to own the means of production (imagine a one-person factory).

It won'y happen overnight, but the capitalist structure will be undermined, gradually replaced by market socialism, eventually leading to the classless society of communism.

At least temporarily. It also gives people a small taste of socialism, which is why right-wingers hate it.

Well yeah, but most realize "full luxury communism" is unlikely to happen in our lifetimes.

Sure, even Marx proposed capitalism as a necessary precursor to communism.

Yep. But if this means ethno-fascism—an ethno-state is more of a pipe dream than the wildest communist utopia—especially in America.

A corporate totalitarian state is more likely, and that is why we fight.